They use their media to assassinate real news. They use their schools to teach children that their president is another Hitler. They use their movie stars and singers and comedy shows and award shows to repeat their narrative over and over again. And then they use their ex-president to endorse “the resistance.”

All to make them march. Make them protest. Make them scream racism and sexism and xenophobia and homophobia. To smash windows, burn cars, shut down interstates and airports, bully and terrorize the law-abiding — until the only option left is for the police to do their jobs and stop the madness.

And when that happens, they’ll use it as an excuse for their outrage. The only way we stop this, the only way we save our country and our freedom, is to fight this violence of lies with the clenched fist of truth.

I’m the National Rifle Association of America. And I’m freedom’s safest place.

A Republican lawmaker this week singled out transgender soldiers as a “threat” to the United States during an interview with Tony Perkins of the Family Research Center, a Christian organization that has for years fought against expanding rights for LGBT citizens.

As ThinkProgress documents, Perkins conducted an interview with Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-MO) this week in which she said the prospect of transgender soldiers constituted a “domestic threat” to U.S. security.

“At a time when we should be focusing on the threats from North Korea, and Putin, and ISIS, we’re having to deal with a threat here at home?—?a domestic threat?—?of allowing transgenders in our service, which is a real problem because it impacts their readiness, and it’s a huge cost for our military,” she told Perkins.

Among other things, Hartzler said she feared surgeries for transgender troops would cost the military too much money, despite the fact that estimates by the RAND Corporation project that gender-transition-related health costs for the military would only go up by between $2.4 million and $8.4 million annually if it allowed transgender people to serve openly.

Before ending her interview, Hartzler reiterated that her goal regarding transgender soldiers would be to “remove this threat from the national defense.”

Raw Story reached out to Hartzler’s office to elaborate on her view that transgender soldiers are a “threat” to the United States, but they did not return calls requesting comment.

Our illiterate, lazy culture has spilled over to many professing Christians who have embraced the ways of the pacifist egalitarian. They are willing to read a modified, pacifist, gender-neutral Bible, missing what God says so that they can continue to ignore their duties with regard to the ongoing Crusade (self-defence). Our modern Bible perversion was written by men using dynamic equivalence. In other words, they are telling you their interpretation and their doctrine, NOT what the manuscripts really say. This can be confirmed by reviewing how the modern Church is using pacifist, fanatically egalitarian and gender-inclusive language. Fanatical egalitarianism, gender inclusiveness and pacifism wasn't in the original texts, in the original Bible. It is a modern, feminist and cultural relativist concept born from the Marxist revolution.

The abundant prosperity of the modern age has brought many blessings when it comes to child-rearing and child development, offering kids new opportunities for education, play, and personal development. Yet even as we celebrate our civilizational departure from excessive child labor, we ought to be wary of falling into a different sort of lopsided lifestyle.

Alas, as a day-to-day reality, work has largely vanished from modern childhood, with parents constantly stressing over the values of study and practice and “social interaction” even as they insulate their children from any activity that might involve risk, pain, or boredom. As a result, many of our kids are coming far too late to the arena of creative service and all it brings: dignity, meaning, freedom, virtue, creativity, character, and neighbor love.

Operating out of a justified fear of the harsh excesses of “harder times,” we have allowed our cultural attitudes to swing too far in the opposite direction, distorting work as a “necessary obligation of adulthood,” a gift too dangerous for kids. Working from these same distorted attitudes, the Washington Post recently published what it described as a “haunting” photo montage of child laborers from America’s rougher past.

The photos surely point to times of extreme lack, of stress and pain. But as Jeffrey Tucker rightly detects, they also represent the faces of those who are actively building enterprises and cities, using their gifts to serve their communities, and setting the foundation of a flourishing nation, in turn. Turns out there is dignity and meaning in that, too:

[...]

In our modern context, loosening up the existing “system” need not (and should not) put our children at risk of 12-hour work days in extreme and dangerous conditions. As Tucker concludes, the current economic avenues for unskilled labor are actually prime territory for introducing our children to risk and service, never mind the side effects of practical education and character cultivation:

[...]

For example, as families, what if we were to rethink our approach to “allowances,” or paid labor in the household in general? What if we were to be more intentional about creating opportunities for work for our kids, or simply to more closely disciple our children toward a full understanding of the role of their work in honoring God and serving neighbor? In our schools and educational systems, what if we stopped prioritizing “intellectual” work to the detriment of practical knowledge and physical labor, paving new paths to a more holistic approach to character formation? In our policy and governing institutions, what if we put power back in the hands of parents and kids, dismantling the range of excessive legal restrictions, minimum wage fixings, and regulations that lead our children to work less and work later? (This could be something as simple as letting a 14-year-old work a few hours a week at a fast-food restaurant or grocery store.)

[...]

Let us not just teach our children to play hard and study well, shuffling them through a long line of hobbies and electives and educational activities. A long day’s work and a load of sweat have plenty to teach as well.

Sometimes, the penalty-statement is a maximum, and not a mandatory penalty. The task of law-interpretation and law-application was one of wisdom, and not a job of accurate third-grade reading skills.

In the most obvious of rape-cases, the criminal was liable to death, see Dt.22:25. But, on the other hand, if the story was he-said/she-said and the case was inconclusive, there was a way to obtain a modicum of justice in a murky situation.

If God--who knows all things--was willing for those children to perish, he had a sufficient moral-justification for it. He did not always so command it; in fact, he made provision at times for mercy. Oddly (to our sentiments, at times) sometimes death (and swift at that) is mercy. Frankly, if an Israelite just left the city and its dead, with a few orphans wandering around in the desolation (hard to bear the thought, yes?) all would likely be dead soon anyway; or enslaved by some other party.

Suppose a case where all able-bodied persons are combatant, and all such persons are judged of God as irreparably corrupt. Stipulated: all of these adults deserve to die, and the warfare is just. Whose responsibility is it to care for their offspring? The Israelites? Why? If at times, when permitted of God, some of these were spared and taken care of by Israelites (not the case in e.g. 1Sam.15:3), this too was mercy; and, importantly, the kindness was not deserved.

We tend to gauge conditions in an ancient setting--or even in some other, rougher part of the world today--by our local standards: be that in sanitation, cuisine, justice, warfare, servitude, etc. We tend to like those parts of our own system that seem to have some sanction of God by loose conformity with our interpretation of the ancient world as we engage with it in the pages of the Bible. We are quick to make absolute connections with more than the moral-law, as if that were a simple task, and unconnected with time or place.

Life was (and sometimes still is) nasty, brutish, and short; mainly on account of sin and a resultant reduction of civility to a minimum. Bridges between societies are notoriously difficult to build and maintain; however much of an ideal it may be. The Ancient Near East was a place without much civility. Societies kept their standards and law within them; but beyond them was a world of conflict. "What's mine is mine; what's yours is negotiable."

Such was the chaos into which God saw fit to introduce a new nation, a covenanted people; while at the same time he judged the Canaanite society to be unfit to remain in the world. God personally had brought more, and more complete, ruin on an entire world--of men, women, and children--only a few generations prior by a flood. Drowning is a frightful and painful way for anyone to die.

God takes numerous children out of this life, who "have no knowledge of right from wrong." Is he evil or unjust for it? If we (rightly) say "No," then if he determined for Israel to be his instrument at one time in world history, he does not need any more justification than his commandment. I have proposed some rationalization in the above commentary, but do not mistake that for theodicy. God needs no such rational defense for his morally perfect will.

(in reply to a post mentioning the Baader-Meinhof phenomenon. https://www.damninteresting.com/the-baader-meinhof-phenomenon/)

My own experience of this:
One morning I read this article extract which had been published in an old magazine:

Turks expanded their empire westward on land, and asserted their naval power in the Mediterranean. In 1565 they attacked Malta, envisioning an eventual invasion of Rome. Though repelled at Malta, the Turks captured Cyprus in the fall of 1570.

The next year, three Catholic powers on the continent – Genoa, Spain, and the Papal States - formed an alliance called the Holy League, to defend their Christian civilization against Turkish invasion. Its fleets sailed to confront the Turks near the west coast of Greece on October 7, 1571.

Crew members on more than 200 ships prayed the Rosary in preparation for the battle - as did Christians throughout Europe, encouraged by the Pope to gather in their churches to invoke the Virgin Mary against the daunting Turkish forces.

Some accounts say that Pope Pius V was granted a miraculous vision of the Holy League's stunning victory. Without a doubt, the Pope understood the significance of the day's events, when he was eventually informed that all but 13 of the nearly 300 Turkish ships had been captured or sunk. He was moved to institute the feast now celebrated universally as Our Lady of the Rosary.

“Turkish victory at Lepanto would have been a catastrophe of the first magnitude for Christendom,” wrote military historian John F. Guilmartin, Jr., “and Europe would have followed a historical trajectory strikingly different from that which obtained.”

I had never heard of the battle of Lepanto before, and that same day I attended Mass where the priest gave a sermon about the battle of Lepanto and the power of the Holy Rosary. And yes, I do believe that this was a divine reminder to me that I should pray more often, because we all underestimate the power of prayer.

As for your Face Book page, your newsprint version quoted 3 pro HB 1523 people to 5 anti-HB1523 people. Your on-line version quoted 1 new pro person to 4 new anti-people. Between both versions, the journalistic slant was 4 conservatives to 9 liberals. So much for fair and balanced.

The 5th circuit was right and Liberals can’t stand it any more than Hillary’s loss, can they? You pro-LGBTQ folks failed to demonstrate how you have been “harmed”. If a place of business has Christian owners that make you uncomfortable then go somewhere else. Vote with your wallet, not your ALCU lawyers. Stop your whining and quit misusing the law to force your beliefs on mine.

Gay marriage was forced upon Christians by one SCOTUS Justice, not 9. Justice Kennedy deliberately made the vote 5-4. He alone decided my 1st Amendment right to live by my religious convictions don’t count and must take a legal back seat to your misguided view that a marriage is not only between a man and woman. Now we’ll see if SCOTUS will rule HB1523 Constitutional. I’m betting they will.

Just yesterday they ruled that Trinity Lutheran Church in Columbia, MO cannot be denied funds provided by a state-run program to re-surface a children’s playground with reprocessed scrap tires. The Missouri Constitution’s support of this unfair denial is an example of their wrong idea of “Separation of Church and State”. But in the court’s majority ruling Justice Roberts wrote “this denial of (state) funding violated the church’s rights under the free exercise clause of the Constitution because it worked as a direct discrimination against the church for being a church.” Notice the word “discrimination” AND who is being discriminated against.

LGBTQ’s have the same rights I have EXCEPT to use the law to force me to accept gay marriage. LGBTQs should be hired if they have the skills to do the job but if they become a negative distraction to other employee’s, business owners must retain the right to terminate them without fear of a lawsuit. Keep the law out of it.

For all you liberals, buck up. You’ve had your say. Now it’s time Justice Kennedy retired and our country can re-affirm its traditional values. Only then will we be “Great” again.

White nationalists have been doing it for years. Everywhere there was colonialism there was also race mixing. That being said, I understand that the mixing of races is detrimental to our culture if they are brought into our society to live amongst us.

In my belief, it is okay for single white men to fuck minority women under any and all circumstances, however it should not be the responsibility of the white man to raise mixed babies and she should never ever be invited or accepted as any part of the family (or country if it were somehow white homogeneous) nor receive any sort of support at all.

Don't tell me that if you were approached by the hottest black/latina/asian girl in the world and she's luring you back to her apartment you wouldn't fuck her because I know you would.

Also, I don't want white women sleeping with minorities. My logic lies within the fact that a white man can have 1,000's of children with multiple white women while your average woman very rarely has more than 5 white babies.

If a man fucks a minority he is a conquistador. If a woman fucks a minority her father has been cucked. It sounds like hypocrisy, yet it's not because both genders were not created equally. It is a priority that we protect our women from this above all else.

Lady Checkmate's headline:
Government hostility to religion spiked under Obama, new report finds

Obama is a form of antichrist. The only people he helped were illegal aliens, muslims and homosexuals. He did nothing for any other American citizens. He is an embarrassment (who pretended to be a Christian) and a mistake many are ashamed to say they supported at one time. So, this report will NOT surprise anyone:

No it doesn't count as islamic governance. Democracy as a concept and ruling system has its origins in kufr and is based on kufr. Prophet Muhammad (saw) only ruled the people by establishing the Khilafah state and implementing the shariah upon them in totality. Democracy puts what laws to choose to a vote and as democracy stands on pillars of other kufr concepts such as freedom of expression (eg what was published by charlie hebdo), free market policies that also permit the sale of alcohol and gambling etc the list of unislamic bases used upon which democracy stands should be enough to realise that it is completely different and incompatible with the implementation of Islam. What has happened in a few Muslim countries like Saudi is that they pick a few Islamic punishments to implement and say that they are implementing shariah when in fact they're not. Or you get countries like Pakistan that claim to be 'Islamic republic' just cos' they misapply some blasphemy laws but at the same time choose to vote for leaders who allow kufaar troops to set up bases in Muslim lands to bomb other Muslims both in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

What has happened is that the Ummah has lost the true Islamic leadership and ruling system for almost a hundred years, so people are so out of touch with the idea of what an Islamic ruling system is supposed to consist of and are so defeatist assuming it's too hard to make it a reality, that instead they seek a 'compromise solution' in which they implement a bit of islam and a bit of kufr and call it 'islamic democracy'- implement a handful of islamic rules to keep the religious lot happy and let the rest of the laws be based on kufr to keep the real leaders in the white house etc happy. There is no such thing as islamic democracy; there is either democracy or there is islam and anyone trying to reconcile the two is deceiving the ummah into compromising a chunk of islamic values.

Rebellion Against God Is Only Rebellion Against One’s Own NatureSatan was an awesome angel. His supernatural intellect and powers were incredible. He was spiritually fulfilled and full of God’s supernatural love and life. So, when he desired to be who he was not, (divine), he rebelled against his own blessed angelic nature. He wanted to go beyond his own God given nature “to be like God”. And he lost everything.
Adam and Eve were also totally fulfilled in being created human beings. All of creation around them was in harmony with God and with them. They had God’s and each others love and had absolutely no needs whatsoever. They felt comfortable with God, each other and their bodies.
They enjoyed a wonderful supernatural friendship with God. They recognized Him as their superior and that they had been created Him. They had a completely open way of communicating with Him, without shame or barriers. They were totally fulfilled in their state of created life.
When the “serpent”, the devil, tempted Eve, he approached her with the thought of her rejecting her created human nature, to “become like God”. If she just obeyed the devil and ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, she would no longer be her own nature, but would be “divine like”. She already knew that God had prohibited that. She would be disobeying God. But she put more trust in the devil’s words than the good God who had created her and loved her.
The created order God instituted was for Adam to obey Him. Then in like manner, God put Adam as lord over all creation, (including Eve), the animals and all living things. When Adam ended up obeying Eve and disobeying God, (because he trusted in her more than God). He then did what Eve suggested and ate from the tree that God had forbidden them to eat from.
In rebelling against God’s rules, they actually rebelled against their own nature. From then on, all of creation became disordered. Their sexual appetite was effected and they felt naked. Their innocent, pure communication with God was destroyed as they tried to hide from Him. Eve, and all women, become emotionally damaged and became overly dependent upon man’s affection and approval. Giving new life to children became painful. Weeds, thorns and enmity creep up everywhere outside paradise where man has been banished to live.
[...]Rebellion is trying to be, in essence and nature, someone whom we are not. This is being disobedient to God and what is called “SIN” in the Bible.
So, here we are in the 21st. century continuing to rebel against God, and in essence, are continual to only rebelling against our own vary nature. For this reason we have become estranged to ourselves and to God.
Feminist are rebels against their own wonderful feminine nature. They, as women, were created to be loved, protected, provided for and nurtured by men. They are to obey God and their husbands as Mary obeyed St. Joseph, the head of the Holy Family. They can enjoy the greatest vocation of being religious sisters or wives and mothers of children. They no longer have to go out in the dog eat dog world. They love, live and reign as queens in their homes. They are the sunshine and heart of their family.
Most feminist are angry, lonely young and old ladies who are very bossy and mean. They get their ways in the church chanceries, offices, religious education departments, and at work. But I have yet to find a kind humble feminist who appreciates her true feminine greatness that she received from God.
Children, when they rebel against there parents, only bring unhappiness into their lives. They quickly becomes aware of this when they fight their parents and move out from under the parents rules to have freedom to do what THEY WANT.
Like Adam and Eve, their eyes are opened to their financial and emotional nakedness. They no longer have the help or protection of their parents. They have to pay all their bills, cook all their food, wash all their clothes and get along with their new roommates (who are selfish like they are). They no longer have their parents advice and love in their home.
We need to recognize what sin is; rebellion against God, His order and rebellion against our very own created nature. Then we need to humbly put ourselves back into subjection (men, women, sons and daughters), under the loving Hand Of God who created us. We can once again happily obey Him, because we know that this is what is in our own best interest as His creatures and the road to happiness once again.
Then man can stop rebelling against God who created him. Government can obey and enforce God’s laws. Catholics can happily obey Jesus and His Church. Wives can obey their husbands. Children can obey their parents.
When every person in authority obeys God fully, then it is easy to obey them. Let us pray that the Kingdom of Jesus Christ will reign again and all will humbly bow down in humble adoration and obey Him. Long Live Christ the King. Long Live Mary our Queen.

Right-wing radio host, commentator and conspiracy theorist Josh Bernstein posted a video yesterday calling on President Trump to shut down CNN and prosecute the network for treason.

Seizing on the news that three CNN journalists responsible for a retracted story about an investigation into the ties between a Trump ally and a Russian bank had resigned, as well as a bogus James O’Keefe “sting” video purporting to show a CNN producer casting doubt on the network’s Russia coverage, Bernstein urged Trump to take swift action to put the network out of business.

“For anybody that is still watching CNN, shame on you,” Bernstein fumed. “Shame on you, because you are supporting communism.”

Bernstein—whose own stringent “editorial standards” allow him to proclaim that all Muslims should be eradicated, that John Podesta is a “serial murderer and hit man” who personally killed Seth Rich and that both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are secretly gay—blasted CNN for having absolutely “no editorial standards and guidelines.”

“You make the North Korean media look honest,” he said, “you bunch of creeps.”

“President Trump, please, pull CNN’s license,” Bernstein begged. “They do not need to be broadcasting anything. Nothing! There is no reason for CNN to be in existence. That place should be shut down for treason, for espionage, for sedition, you name it. I would love the see the Justice Department literally file complaints and lawsuits against CNN.”

On his program yesterday, Right-wing radio host Jesse Lee Peterson attacked Hillary Clinton for encouraging children to read and said that parents should never allow their kids to read the Harry Potter series.

Peterson began by declaring that Barack Obama “is going down in history as the most hated, worst, weak, poor, pathetic, pitiful excuse of a president” who brought this nation “right at the brink of destruction” until God stepped in by electing Donald Trump.

“God said, ‘Hold up, I’m not going to let this happen. Where is Trump? Jesus, go over there and talk to Trump and tell him I need him to do something for me,'” Peterson said. “And now the president is making America great again.”

Peterson then turned his attention to Clinton, who he said “keeps going down into the pits of hell, sucking the blood out of the dead and coming back, trying to hold on” to her relevance.

“That is an evil, evil, nasty, dirty woman,” he said. “Thank God, thank God, thank God she did not win as president.”

Peterson was outraged that Clinton had spoken at an American Library Association conference, where she said that books like the Harry Potter series have been proven to teach children to have compassion for those who are different.

“If that is true, immediately stop your children from reading Harry Potter,” Peterson said. “If it’s true that reading Harry Potter causes kids to be more open to immigrants and LGBT people, then you’re going to pay for brainwashing, traumatizing, turning your children away from good toward evil. I would shut down those books right away if that’s true.”

Genuine question; we hear a lot about the nutty Christian right in the US, but is there a Christian left? Who's the American equivalent of Rowan Williams?

Leftist Christians I find to be what is called "fair weather christians" . They go to church on the prescribed holidays, they got the jesus picture up somewhere and they identify as Christian. When in truth, they are agnostic or atheist at heart, but the social stigma they worry about leads them to do the social obligation of showing up to church and such.

It's my opinion and I reserve the right to be wrong about it. *shrugs*

(On an article about a born-again Christian intentionally ramming a newly erected statue of the ten commandments outside the Arkansas Capitol then running off and making a bizarre anti-Obama rant. Said incident was bizarre but not the sort of fundie I submit)

"when Reed crashed into it. He was not formally charged and instead was treated for mental health issues."

3 years ago you'd use it's scientific name. Atheism

Wonder if they had to beat him to get his fedora off for the mug shot .

Different posters: How many of the liberals here would be praising him if he had run down a monument that was relevant to Islam?

All the same ones who praise him now, if that monument were erected on public land.

Nope.avi

Atheisim is for Christianity only. Because reasons. And if someone damaged a religious monument of any religion other than Christianity or Judaism there would be wholeharted outrage on this site.